 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Wow, into the lift queue!
Surely that's a massive failure of ski patrol. That slope looks like it must be made safe before that lift and piste is opened.
It looks like a slope many would ski.
It does feel like the European "if you are 1cm off the side of the piste wero have no responsibility" approach should be changed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@dazzle109, I’d agree. That looks like it needs a Gazex above it.
Very old vid ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@dazzle109, to be fair, in most places that would have been blasted before the runs opened, so not sure you can blame the European approach as much as a specific failure. Quite scary seeing that, must've been a bum twitchy moment for all in the lift queue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| dazzle109 wrote: |
Wow, into the lift queue!
Surely that's a massive failure of ski patrol. That slope looks like it must be made safe before that lift and piste is opened.
It looks like a slope many would ski.
It does feel like the European "if you are 1cm off the side of the piste wero have no responsibility" approach should be changed |
Not a lawyer, but I presume that the different approaches are due to differences in tort law and such things? So would be hard for the approach to change?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How has that slope not been secured?!?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
It does feel like the European "if you are 1cm off the side of the piste wero have no responsibility" approach should be changed
|
Why? It's fairly clear - unless otherwise stated - as soon as you go off-piste you are at your own risk. The fact that some like to play mental gymnastics "if it's between 2 pistes", "if x lift is open area y is safe" etc. doesn't negate that. Yes there will be rare occasions where mistakes are made and a slope will avalanche into a piste, but the same rare mistakes do happen in n America and result in avalanches in "safe" terrain.
| Quote: |
different approaches are due to differences in tort law and such things?
|
It's a widely made claim, but I've never seen any evidence to support it. If anything you'd thing n America would go with the more strict only pistes are secured approach due to presumably greater risk of lawsuits. However, if you ever read the small print on the back of a n American lift pass you would quickly realise you've gave up any kind of rights!
From a practical sense n America resorts are much smaller and often funnel down to a single base. So from a practical view much easier to avy control everything "in bounds". I don't think a piste only resort in n America could be a success as there seems to be much more demand for off piste - however it's a chicken and egg thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
My comment re, off the edge of the piste is the same as wildly off piste is meant in the context that half the resort would ski that slope. So saying we only secure pistes is a cop out. I mean that generally not for just this time.
For this slide, that lift should never have been opened with that ready to slide, directly above the lift queue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| SnoodyMcFlude wrote: |
| @dazzle109, to be fair, in most places that would have been blasted before the runs opened, |
how do you know it wasn't?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Nobody wants to question the two idiots skiing the line together on a level 4 day? Loads of avalanches in resort terrain yesterday, and some very lucky people who somehow got away with it 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Scarlet wrote: |
| Nobody wants to question the two idiots skiing the line together on a level 4 day? Loads of avalanches in resort terrain yesterday, and some very lucky people who somehow got away with it |
or the other 4 idiots (who may have been the same ones) who'd done similar before them
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
@Weathercam, and that took someone out!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@t44tomo, Yeah, there were tracks, which may not have been the smartest idea in the first place, but it's possible that the forces generated by two skiers are what caused the avalanche – if they'd have gone one a time, it may not have happened. Or maybe it would, hard to say, but protocol is one at a time.
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Thu 30-01-25 16:08; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@Weathercam, We have plenty of them here as well. You always know which week as the queue for the lift pass office on Saturday morning stretches across the snowfront. Something to do with reluctance/inability to pay on a French website for that demographic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| chocksaway wrote: |
| @Weathercam, We have plenty of them here as well. You always know which week as the queue for the lift pass office on Saturday morning stretches across the snowfront. Something to do with reluctance/inability to pay on a French website for that demographic. |
That's not really fair, I had to queue a few times at French ticket offices becase SunWeb gives out vouchers to collect the passes from the offices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Yeah not a fan of the clip here because there is a risk it glorifies such risk taking. Certainly appeared a fair amount of Darwinism in the decision to go in together and push a line further under the hangfire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
My comment re, off the edge of the piste is the same as wildly off piste is meant in the context that half the resort would ski that slope. So saying we only secure pistes is a cop out. I mean that generally not for just this time.
|
Resorts are completely in their right to say we only secure the pistes and you go off them at your own risk. Your suggestion they secure some off piste which is "accessible", "popular" or some other vague indefinable term just opens up a huge can of worms. The only sensible options are just pistes or everything in bounds. Anything else is just asking for trouble as it creates a huge grey area.
If you don't like the euro set up go to n America or do some avy training so you can ski where you want safely.
| Quote: |
Nobody wants to question the two idiots skiing the line together on a level 4 day?
|
At this point it seems par for the course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
Your suggestion they secure some off piste which is "accessible", "popular" or some other vague indefinable term just opens up a huge can of worms.
|
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| boarder2020 wrote: |
| Resorts are completely in their right to say we only secure the pistes and you go off them at your own risk. |
They do say that. I think the point people are making in this case is that is seems curious that the slope that went hadn't been secured. Not secured so people could ski the off piste risk free, but secured due to the risk a slide on that slope would pose to the piste and lift infrastructure below. Normally avalanche control would have been completed in Europe for that purpose.
A more general point about Euro vs US that is often not mentioned, but I heard the other day, is that the reason Europe couldn't copy the US model if that is what paying customers desired and would pay for isn't just avalanche risk. Alongside avy control the other aspects of safety performed in the US are marking all of the hazards (cliffs etc) and closing the slopes at the end of the day. Neither of these things would be practical in Europe due to the sheer size of the terrain that is accessible and that you could easily end up in a completely different valley. Largely avy control is probably the least problematic because a lot of that is done already to protect the pistes and infrastructure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I think the point people are making in this case is that is seems curious that the slope that went hadn't been secured. Not secured so people could ski the off piste risk free, but secured due to the risk a slide on that slope would pose to the piste and lift infrastructure below. Normally avalanche control would have been completed in Europe for that purpose.
|
This. To me it looked (from that angle) pretty obviously high risk. Anywhere I can think of with that general topography above a lift has Gazex installed.
And, yes, North Am generally has very different topography.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| Quote: |
I think the point people are making in this case is that is seems curious that the slope that went hadn't been secured. Not secured so people could ski the off piste risk free, but secured due to the risk a slide on that slope would pose to the piste and lift infrastructure below. Normally avalanche control would have been completed in Europe for that purpose.
|
This. To me it looked (from that angle) pretty obviously high risk. Anywhere I can think of with that general topography above a lift has Gazex installed.
And, yes, North Am generally has very different topography. |
I mentioned in the Arlberg thread a while ago that it appears to my eye that there was a lot more avalanche fences in the arlberg (Lech in particular) than I had noticed in other resorts. It might have been anecdotal but it seemed significant to me. I believe "money" was the answer I was given due to "Lech".
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
They do say that. I think the point people are making in this case is that is seems curious that the slope that went hadn't been secured. Not secured so people could ski the off piste risk free, but secured due to the risk a slide on that slope would pose to the piste and lift infrastructure below. Normally avalanche control would have been completed in Europe for that purpose.
|
When I say "secure the pistes" that of course includes overhead danger. If things are sliding into the pistes that is a sign that they haven't in fact been secured, and yes I'd be questioning the resort as to why.
Of course mistakes do happen. There are cases where a face is bombed and cut and doesn't release until someone manages to find a weak spot to trigger. Of course I have no idea if the resort did do any control, or if not their reasoning why.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Control didn't release. You can imagine that standard operating procedure would be updated after this. I guess that is one of those things where safety is progressive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| afterski wrote: |
| I mentioned in the Arlberg thread a while ago that it appears to my eye that there was a lot more avalanche fences in the arlberg (Lech in particular) than I had noticed in other resorts. It might have been anecdotal but it seemed significant to me. I believe "money" was the answer I was given due to "Lech". |
There are a lot of avalanche barriers in Tirol. It's because of the Galtür avalanche. Nobody wants to see that again. I guess Lech is Vorarlberg, but in this case, same same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
BBC4 is showing a programme on Avalanches right now (part of the Dangerous Earth series)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| davidof wrote: |
| SnoodyMcFlude wrote: |
| @dazzle109, to be fair, in most places that would have been blasted before the runs opened, |
how do you know it wasn't? |
Fair point, but it does seem to be a big release quite easily. You are quite right though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| SnoodyMcFlude wrote: |
| davidof wrote: |
| SnoodyMcFlude wrote: |
| @dazzle109, to be fair, in most places that would have been blasted before the runs opened, |
how do you know it wasn't? |
Fair point, but it does seem to be a big release quite easily. You are quite right though. |
it is Italy so I accept you are probably right and I couldn't see any trace of them trying to control the slope except for what looks like a track and sluff at the summit... but the resolution wasn't great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
This was posted this morning on Instagram by someone I know who works with the avalanche service in Tirol, though it is his personal view rather than an official statement from the Lawinenwarndienst:
| Quote: |
After last week's avalanche at @ski.sulden.solda many freeriders criticized the resort for not bombing the slope before opening the lifts. But let's be real:
1. Blasting doesn't guarantee safety. A single on-surface blast only secures a limited radius. To FULLY stabilize a slope, you'd need a lot explosives, which leaves toxic residues and fumes in our beloved nature.
2. Sometimes bombing is riskier than leaving it. If a triggered avalanche becomes too big, it can take out infrastructure-which has happened before. In this case, if the entire slope had released with additional entrainment, the lift damage would have been much worse.
3. "At least put signs there" - There were signs and warnings throughout the resort. How many do we need? And who's hiking up a sketchy slope just to place another sign for the "all-the-gear-no-idea" freerider who still won't get it? I wouldn't wanna be that poor guy...
4. "Why not just close the lift?" Let's be honest-freeriders duck ropes. It's part of the culture (just look at Japan, NA and so on). The slope in question is hard to access, and if there's no danger of a natural release, why shut down a lift for everyone? If that's the new standard, good luck operating any lift above tree line in the Alps. Terrain is controlled to operate lifts &
runs - not for freeriders.
5. Take responsibility. The two freeriders who triggered the slide left without identifying themselves. That's unacceptable. As freeriders, we should help those in need-just as we'd want help if we messed up. Even if no one was harmed, make a report and ID yourself to allow questions from SAR. Rescue resources are limited, even in the Alps. There have been cases where the Army had to step in-costing precious time that someone might not have.
Get the gear AND the idea. Be responsible to be a true FREErider!
PS: I'm a dedicated freerider & my moral standards in this case resemble the legal situation - not more not less. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
